Eiden's post is a pretty fair rundown of why I've written off attempting meaningful interaction with Thy as a pointless endeavor. Sooner or later it always devolves into incomprehensible tangential nonsense and self-righteous condescension._________________The older I get, the more certain I become of one thing. True and abiding cynicism is simply a form of cowardice.

There are plenty of people with conditions that make it so that they have significant or total difficulties in understanding the difference between what they are conveying and what thought processes are self-evident to them. In plenty of these circumstances you will end up with very constant issues like this (definitely worse than random chance!) in when they are attempting to communicate their ideas and standpoints, because they will convey messages that rely on the idea that what they are thinking is much more intuitive and coherently on display for others than they actually are. The end result is surreal to witnesses.

That last post of yours could be a perfect example of that, Thy. There is a part where, to put it bluntly, you went off into la-la land. "Every day is a fresh start for a carefree personality. ... The fact that you freely associate with your past selves means that you simply don't have the ambition to improve yourself greatly every single day."

This is the point at which while you are probably pretty internally sure that people know or should know what the hell you are on about, you have legitimately stopped making sense to others. You are disjointedly rambling about weird things you haven't explained to anyone. They're completely disconnected and weird statements that are completely nonsensical outside of some internal understanding you have which you have never been able to coherently provide for anyone. Nobody knows what you're talking about, and will say so, and your response is adamantly critical, as though it is RIDICULOUS that what you are talking about isn't coherent and immediately accessible. You justify this to yourself by saying that the fault must lie in insufficient scrutiny or thought on the part of others, that the "meaning is so obvious, if you would just stop to think about it" or something and it's really not.

Guilt by association is a fallacy and so I am guilty of a fallacy because I freely associate with my past selves. It seriously sounds like stuff you listen to shadowing a case worker, where you know it makes complete sense to the person who is saying it, and they really seriously believe this stuff is supposed to make sense to everyone (if only they would just open their eyes!) but this is not the case.

There are plenty of people with conditions that make it so that they have significant or total difficulties in understanding the difference between what they are conveying and what thought processes are self-evident to them. In plenty of these circumstances you will end up with very constant issues like this (definitely worse than random chance!) in when they are attempting to communicate their ideas and standpoints, because they will convey messages that rely on the idea that what they are thinking is much more intuitive and coherently on display for others than they actually are. The end result is surreal to witnesses.

That last post of yours could be a perfect example of that, Thy. There is a part where, to put it bluntly, you went off into la-la land. "Every day is a fresh start for a carefree personality. ... The fact that you freely associate with your past selves means that you simply don't have the ambition to improve yourself greatly every single day."

This is the point at which while you are probably pretty internally sure that people know or should know what the hell you are on about, you have legitimately stopped making sense to others. You are disjointedly rambling about weird things you haven't explained to anyone. They're completely disconnected and weird statements that are completely nonsensical outside of some internal understanding you have which you have never been able to coherently provide for anyone. Nobody knows what you're talking about, and will say so, and your response is adamantly critical, as though it is RIDICULOUS that what you are talking about isn't coherent and immediately accessible. You justify this to yourself by saying that the fault must lie in insufficient scrutiny or thought on the part of others, that the "meaning is so obvious, if you would just stop to think about it" or something and it's really not.

Guilt by association is a fallacy and so I am guilty of a fallacy because I freely associate with my past selves. It seriously sounds like stuff you listen to shadowing a case worker, where you know it makes complete sense to the person who is saying it, and they really seriously believe this stuff is supposed to make sense to everyone (if only they would just open their eyes!) but this is not the case.

Would an excellent (if *extreme*) example of this be the Timecube guy?_________________"No, but evil is still being --Is having reason-- Being reasonable! Mousie understands? Is always being reason. Is punishing world for not being... Like in head. Is always reason. World should be different, is reason."
-Ed, from Digger

Eiden, it is quite clear to me that you have no idea what my thought processes are, or why I post what I post.

YES. EXACTLY. You have almost stumbled onto realizing what you are missing that people have tried to convey to you many times over the course of literal years! THINK ABOUT THIS.

You generally DO NOT MAKE SENSE AT ALL in a lot of arguments. People NOTE THIS ABOUT YOU. They note that you go off on often absurd tangents and inexplicable bits of "logic" which fail to connect to what was being said before. Nobody knows why you post what you post! Much of the time nobody knows where you're going with anything, either! It is not the fault of the observers in this case, and you will note (!) that it is very different from people claiming that they understand your thought processes are.

I'm in full agreement with this.

Does anybody (other than Thy) disagree?

This is a huge part of my problem with Thy, and another huge part is that he seems intent on changing the meaning of his words after he's said them just to avoid admitting that somebody really did get them right the first time. His "conversations" are usually a huge retcon, reacting to what the other person is saying only to distance himself from their point.
I feel that way because it's hard to believe that his thoughts are really so alien that everybody is constantly wrong about them. Worse than random chance. It just doesn't work out that way, so it's hard not to conclude that he's doing it on purpose (whether he recognizes it or not).

Oh gosh, except when my observations are right on the fuckin money.

As I said before Eiden, you are under the weird impression that posting disjointed thoughts is in fact nonsensical.

It's a style of posting.

I can easily change up my style.

I'm still waiting for a reason why my original post is offensive.

You are actively avoiding answering this.

If your "BUT HE HAS A PAST HISTORY OF BEING AN ECCENTRIC" is all you got, I'm going to be thoroughly amused.

Quote:

I like what happens when you try to apply this logic in the real world.

We're not in the real world. Try again.

Your analogy of being in a court of law doesn't work here , and frankly you've never met me in person; whatever idiosyncrasies or impressions I display online are directly caused by the act of converting thought to text. These idiosyncrasies will simply disappear when converting thought to speech.

The type of tonality I use is difficult to understand. It isn't easily represented online. I'm about 80% certain that's the real problem here.

Eiden's post is a pretty fair rundown of why I've written off attempting meaningful interaction with Thy as a pointless endeavor. Sooner or later it always devolves into incomprehensible tangential nonsense and self-righteous condescension.

I think if Thy were to actually post something along the lines of "Sorry, I was wrong, you were right" that it might lead to something like this._________________...if a single leaf holds the eye, it will be as if the remaining leaves were not there.http://about.me/omardrake

Clearly, we are all simply educated-stupid, and do not understand the beauty of the four-day timecube._________________"No, but evil is still being --Is having reason-- Being reasonable! Mousie understands? Is always being reason. Is punishing world for not being... Like in head. Is always reason. World should be different, is reason."
-Ed, from Digger

This is the point at which while you are probably pretty internally sure that people know or should know what the hell you are on about, you have legitimately stopped making sense to others.

i don't even know if that's the case. he says "Every day is a fresh start for a carefree personality. ... The fact that you freely associate with your past selves means that you simply don't have the ambition to improve yourself greatly every single day." except every time he comes to Sinfest, he always seems to somehow decide that today his self is going to be the same rambling, incoherent, intellectually dishonest, creepy, unscrupulous weirdo that he was every other time he came to Sinfest.

so maybe he just knows he's been caught on his douchey behavior and now he's making like a fighter jet and releasing chaff to confound enemy targeting systems.

that he now claims it's a matter of his style and tone, which he could "easily change"--but, as we can see, doesn't--makes me think that, neurological weirdness notwithstanding, maybe he's just a great big bag of dicks.

Well, he's definitely eccentric. Eccentric is, uh, a word for the way he acts. And while it's certainly an inextricable part of his character and his interpersonal challenges and failings here, it's not on all the time. It's just that we have years of consistent demonstration that he can't self-regulate in a way that would remove the part where he's being a shithole to people and is oblivious to why he shouldn't be doing/saying what he's doing.

We've been here before and I know I have already spent a shitzillion words explaining — even patiently, once — where he is saying something that is odiously factually incorrect, or greatly inappropriate, or both. At some point, you have to quit. There is absolutely a reason why my response to Thy has been slowly boiled down to, essentially, "fuck off." Eccentricity ain't no crime, but between his jaw-droppingly shitty pseudopsychological analyses and personal history bomb-drops of people, his extreme irrationality on subjects that he becomes excruciatingly fixated on, and the fact that he has legitimately been outed as a serial total bullshitter (by now we have multiple case studies on why you absolutely cannot trust him on anything, he lies and obfuscates shit and he contorts and hedges when he gets caught red-handed at it) there is no reason to expect that he is going to change.

This has gone on for literal years. There's a reason why my response to him has slowly been boiled and rended down beyond giving him any benefit of the doubt or wanting him to be here at all ever. There's no problem at this point with only wanting him to fuck off, and there's no problem with accepting that he doesn't deserve (nor should anyone expect anyone else to provide him) any sort of accommodation or space to live down the spectacularly shitty and crazy behavior he has subjected multiple other people to in the past.

my only problem with eiden's post is that she didn't respond to
"Eiden, it is quite clear to me that you have no idea ... why I post what I post."

because i have no idea whatsoever why he posts what he posts.

or why he keeps posting it here.

especially since it keeps getting the same response, which he clearly doesn't like. if he is such a carefree personality who starts each day afresh, why doesn't his fresh start ever include going somewhere else? why does he keep associating with all the past selves that hang out here?_________________aka: neverscared!
a flux of vibrant matter

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2013 5:00 pm Post subject: He then pretends to win, as if that could be convincing.

Sam wrote:

Well, he's definitely eccentric. Eccentric is, uh, a word for the way he acts. And while it's certainly an inextricable part of his character and his interpersonal challenges and failings here, it's not on all the time. It's just that we have years of consistent demonstration that he can't self-regulate in a way that would remove the part where he's being a shithole to people and is oblivious to why he shouldn't be doing/saying what he's doing.

We've been here before and I know I have already spent a shitzillion words explaining — even patiently, once — where he is saying something that is odiously factually incorrect, or greatly inappropriate, or both. At some point, you have to quit. There is absolutely a reason why my response to Thy has been slowly boiled down to, essentially, "fuck off." Eccentricity ain't no crime, but between his jaw-droppingly shitty pseudopsychological analyses and personal history bomb-drops of people, his extreme irrationality on subjects that he becomes excruciatingly fixated on, and the fact that he has legitimately been outed as a serial total bullshitter (by now we have multiple case studies on why you absolutely cannot trust him on anything, he lies and obfuscates shit and he contorts and hedges when he gets caught red-handed at it) there is no reason to expect that he is going to change.

This has gone on for literal years. There's a reason why my response to him has slowly been boiled and rended down beyond giving him any benefit of the doubt or wanting him to be here at all ever. There's no problem at this point with only wanting him to fuck off, and there's no problem with accepting that he doesn't deserve (nor should anyone expect anyone else to provide him) any sort of accommodation or space to live down the spectacularly shitty and crazy behavior he has subjected multiple other people to in the past.

Full of slander and downright petty accusations. This is the tag team debate style he has. Waiting for a 3rd party to wear down the target with pointless accusatory banter, he will then try to strike the target down in a single blow, while the target is burdened with useless semantics.

The debate tactic of a coward.

I see you don't mind using your sociology degree for evil sam.

You have ulterior motives for wanting me gone.

You have major issues with my non-conformist attitude.

You would really prefer it if your statements went unquestioned.

My naturally curious and open sensibilities really don't mesh with your authoritative style posting, which is carefully calculated, and kinda fake if you ask me.

It's a pity that people undergoing such different viewpoints of the human condition can't seem to get along.

Yeah, tons of slander and petty accusations. Like when I dismissively summed you up as being a broken fragile being with a frail ego who was addicted to negativity, how you only posted in response to me because you were intimidated by me, and that you were completely incapable of being passionate about anything and that everything you do is a constant life act to compensate for how broken and alone I am. Or that time that I sex-shamed you for alternate personal sexual practices. Or that time before that

oh! wait. I have this all totally mixed the fuck up. Wait, it's you who says this shit constantly about me. My god, you were the weirdo slanderer all along. Ha ha, I almost totally forgot.

I guess I will add that I apparently don't mind 'using my sociology degree for evil' to your list of silly shit you say about me when you lose your already pretty wobbly unstable head, ya dope.

Anyway, keep coming up with inane bullshit about me and then obliviously ponder how sad it is that I just won't let you into my heart, or whatever. Really seriously excited to hear about what my ulterior motives for wanting you gone are, and how they play into how I apparently craft fake authoritarian posts to suit my real authoritarian anti-dissent nature (however the fuck that works)

la la la~

Quote:

He then pretends to win, as if that could be convincing.

What's the contest and does literally a single other person here not hold the opinion that you lost